“When, that is, the profession can no longer evade anomalies that subvert the existing tradition of scientific practice—then begin the extraordinary investigations that lead the profession at last to a new set of commitments, a new basis for the practice of science. The extraordinary episodes in which that shift of professional commitments occurs are the ones known in this essay as scientific revolutions. They are the tradition-shattering complements to the tradition-bound activity of normal science.” (Kuhn, Structure of Scientific Revolutions 1970, p.6).
State as clearly as you can what you think Kuhn is arguing here.
Does “normal science” understood broadly require “anomalies” and “extraordinary investigations” in order to progress? Why or why not?
Place this order with us and get 18% discount now! to earn your discount enter this code: special18 If you need assistance chat with us now by clicking the live chat button.
Call Us: USA +1 862 207 3288